I found the frame time articles here on Tech Report interesting since I’m looking to upgrade my system. I currently have a Q9550 (oc’d to 3.4) quad core duo sitting in a GA-EP45-UDR3 Gigabyte mb with 8 gig of DDR2 ram and a EVGA GTX560TI powered by a 650 watt Antec power supply. I just installed a Kingston Hyper X 240 Gb SSD and I’m running Win8. Overall the system is running well. Win8 is running BF3 better than Win7 ever did. Not only is it faster FPS wise but it also is smoother with no stuttering but like everyone else I want to go faster. BF3 maintains 60 fps on a combination of medium-low settings. This computer is a dedicated gaming system so I don’t care about anything else. Ok, I have about $350 US to upgrade my rig with. My three options are:1.Upgrade the GPU to a GTX670.2.Upgrade the CPU to an I3570k, new motherboard and ddr 3 ram.3.Upgrade the CPU to an I2500k, new motherboard and ddr 3 ram (currently $50 cheaper than a 3570k).My feeling is to go with option #3 as the performance difference between 3570k and the 2500k is very small, PCI 3.0 offers nothing over PCI 2.0 and when this computer is running it is running very hard do things like the onboard graphics don’t mean much. Then upgrading the GPU next summer. Your thoughts?

I don't think you would see a large increase in frames by upgrading your processor (unless you're playing Skyrim), but this is a good idea if you prefer to wait until the next generation of graphics cards come out next year.

I was thinking that a 670 or even a 660ti would only give me a modest frame rate increase and that it might be better to hold off for the next gen GPUs. The CPU is might be another story. I am at least 2 generations behind the current CPU and while that may only bring a modest increase in and of itself the difference that a new motherboard would make is quite a bit when you factor in DDR3 over DDR2, SATA III over SATA II and the possibility of SLI which my current board can’t do. I think the inherent latencies built into the P45 board, the Intel 775 processor the DDR2 and slower SATA might make a noticeable difference in game. Currently MicroCenter has a sale on the 2500k for $139 US and if I buy a processor the Asrock Z77 Extreme4 LGA motherboard is only $94 US. Throw in 8gb ram for around $35 US and I’m walking out the door for $290 US with a pretty well updated computer. What I want to know if the 3570k for $50 more bucks is worth the price?

With the Ivy Bridge Chip you don't get a real performance increase but you do get PCI-e 3.0 and lower power consumption. I think PCI-e 3.0 support is worth the $50 if you plan to wait a few years before you upgrade your CPU again since GPUs will be able to take advantage of PCI-e 3.0 in the near future.

Everything I'm seeing about PCIe 3.0 shows it won't be fully utilized until the next generation of GPUs comes out. Even then I don't think the real fruit of it will be for another couple of years (if ever) before we see games really taking advantage of the format. And I think only the high-end motherboards that are capable of x16 multiple slots. The lower power consumption would be nice but at $50 in difference it would take a couple of years to see it payoff I think.My thinking is that it will take a couple of years for PCIe 3.0 to mature and by then Ivy Bridge processor will be the bottleneck. So do I gain any advantage by going low now and then completely upgrading the system later? Or will I see an advantage to getting the Ivy Bridge now. I most likely won’t SLI but who knows? If I could right now and I found a GTX560ti low enough I would.

I guess it all boils down to this…A video card would give me a modest boost in frame rates and frame time if I opted for that but I would still be stuck with and old architecture, slow SATA and no SLI.If I buy the 2500k I will get most everything I can need and save $50. If I get the 3570k I will get the most updated architecture and the use of PCIe 3.0 if ever shows any promise on this platform.The 2500k will likely do me for the foreseeable future but the 700 series card is coming out next year might actually make the 3570k a better choice in the long term. I don’t plan on upgrading the cpu for 2 years but I most likely will upgrade the gpu late next summer. And knowing me I will always wonder what if I had the 3570k…

I'm not so sure that an Ivy Bridge i5 chip will be a bottle neck with the next couple of years. I don't think that the original i7 chips (LGA 1366) bottleneck current graphics cards except for maybe in a few games that are CPU limited.

I was thinking that a 670 or even a 660ti would only give me a modest frame rate increase and that it might be better to hold off for the next gen GPUs.

Looking at Bench, the 660Ti would give you an average 53.1% more performance and the 670 would give you 74.7% more performance than your 560Ti (all numbers for 1080p resolution). I'd say that's more than a 'modest increase'. You are right however that your CPU might be holding the GPUs back, so you may not hit the same performance increases that Anand did.

EDIT: Didn't realize that you were running a Q9550 CPU. If you're going to be doing any heavy CPU lifting, then a corei5 would be a good upgrade; the 560Ti is still a decent GPU for gaming and should last you a little while longer.

EDIT2: Guess you already came to the same conclusion. That's what I get for not reading through all the posts .

I figured that I should lay the groundwork for a better video card that I'll buy later on. I figure I'll wait til I hear something more definative on the next gen video cards before buying one. Or maybe I'll run into a real sweet deal on a 560ti and try out the SLI bridge!